ScottSA

You can mystify stoneage culture all you want Rue, but the reason you're not sitting in a hide tent freezing and hoping that dinner lopes along soon is that you don't belong to that culture. Oh, wait...are you over 35? You'd be dead by now if you lived in that culture. Here you drag the red herring of "history" across the trail. I have news for you Rue. Indian history wasn't a long romp through idylic fields of clover, and sunny sylvan afternoons spent down by the brook. It was nasty brutish and short, and anything you can dredge up from European history can be found in any other culture around the globe. Maybe not the specifics, but most certainly the general theme. But here's the clincher...we dont burn witches, Jews or gypsies at the stake anymore Rue. We haven't done it for years and years, and it's not because someone made us stop, unlike the practice of scalping and skinning alive that certain tribes used to have a hankering for. Our society, unlike most, actually evolves. I don't know if you're aware of the rarity of that little fact, but it's not common, and it speaks very well of our society. You say there's a problem with the environment? What other culture would take the time to even try to deal with it? China? India? Stone age tribes who would still be driving herds of buffalo over cliffs if left to their own devices? Our society Rue. We had the drive and the cultural infrastructure to create the benefits that everyone else wants (including Indians), and we are the only society with the surplus, the drive, and the moral imperitive to deal with the side effects of that progress.

Lol...you obviously don't read the sites you post. The first one you're relying on is 1995, and has to do with the US immigration stats at that time...no where else. Further, it doesn't say what you're hoping it says. The second one you post is also from the early 90s, and concludes exactly the opposite of what you're hoping it does: Come back when you learn to read what you're posting.

Robert McNamara has got to be in his 90s by now, so he can be forgiven the addled memory. Perhaps he would be so good as to point at the plans for Southern occupation of the north? He can't, so he's just being silly. Saigon never ever planned to take over Hanoi. You are, as usual, arguing well out of your depth.

I hate to break this little historical tidbit to you, but the South wasn't fighting to occupy North Vietnam, it was fighting to keep North Vietnam out of South Vietnam. I have another newsflash for you too...Vietnam wasn't a civil war; it was two sovereign nations at war. And just what does the overthrow of Diem have in parallel with some hypothetical never-contemplated occupation of North Vietnam? If the US hadn't cared about the war escalating with China and the USSR, and if the war aim had been the takeover of North Vietnam, it would have done so in a week. Unfortunately, suceessive democratic admins in the US bought into Limited War theory and practised n incrimentalist approach.

We're not. We're taking one. Like to join?

Never mind that poppycock. Man evolved in one place, and one place only. Scotland. You want peer review? Why, just ask Angus McSnatchasheep Esq. I don't know why they went to Africa afterwards...perhaps it had a nice climate at the time...but from Scotland they came, an' that's the Gospel, ken?

It's not clear to me what exactly is wrong with a country not wanting foreign troublemakers immigrating. Or, for that matter, anyone at all immigrating. I'm still waiting to be shown some form of moral imperitive that countries in the west are somehow under an obligation to become multicoloured stewpots.

And don't forget the happy smiling faces in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge! BTW, Batista didn't make a habit of slaughtering thousands under extra-legal whim judgements by Che, the psychotic under-endowed freakshow. And some would argue that Bush arranged 911 and that man never set foot on the moon. Some would even argue that the earth is flat. You're aligning yourself in good company!

Achtung! Achtung! Leaf! Now!

I absolutely hate the victim mentality. You did stuff and got caught, including, I suspect, keeping a dog in an apartment that probably doesn't allow dogs (speaking of subtext), and have incorporated it in a general pean of persecution. You may find yourself too clever to live in the real world with mere mortals, who do stuff like pay taxes and own property and so on, but that's a choice you willingly made, so you probably ought to accept the consequences of your choice.

I'm sure there were many honest, hardworking and sincere Nazis too. Not to equate judges with Nazis, but your line of reasoning; using the specific to argue the universal; doesn't work.

Why thank you. I've always suspected that my relatives are clever folks, so I sent them your theories for comment. After reading them, they decided that anti-psychotic medicine is the best route, although several of them seem to have taken my reference to "black sheep on the BB" literally, so watch your rear for the next few days.

I suspect because the burden of proof lies with the positive claimant. If I claim the sky is falling, the onus is on me to prove that it is. I cannot expect everyone to rush out and start fires to ensure a steady stream of bouyant hot air to prop up the sky. The single most stressed argument I have heard for manmade global warming is the claim that everyone says it's true, albiet in polysyllabic format: "overwhelming consensus". That's no argument at all. The actual science rests entirely...entirely....upon theoretical models, themselves dependent on input. Global warming may or may not be occuring...even that is in question. If it is, whether humans are causing it is another entirely different question. If it is occuring, and if humans are causing it, the next question is whether it is actually bad or good. Sure, Peter Mansbridge went out and found a micro island that might get wet if and when the caps melt, but by and large, the northern hemisphere will actually benefit for a host of reasons...even CBC admits that. And it's not at all clear that there will be significant repercussions in the equatorial regions either...sure, we hear about Bangladesh getting wet, but Christ, Bangladesh is underwater on an annual basis anyway, so that's not a startling change by any means. Quite frankly, given the apparent outcome, I'll vote for the next government that plans to increase CO2 output, just on the off chance that GW is actually occuring, and occuring because of manmade actions. Grapes in Greenland? Hell yeah! This entire thing is generated by some kind of psychological need for a doomsday. It would normally be harmless, had it not been hijacked by the global socialists and turned into a good excuse for redistribution.

Mankind descended from the trees in Scotland and then went to the Americas. And Africa, for that matter, to which the crown of Scotland is entitled. I don't know where all mankind ended up after the descent, but if it's not Scottish it's crrrap.

You really have to ramp up your attempts at sarcasm. Poorly executed sarcasm just makes the delivery suck and the deliveree look foolish.

Spare me the hamfisted sarcasm. You live in a manner few people in the world live in, and it's a result of the surplus created, not by the happenstance of resource location, but the social system that allowed us to exploit it. Grow up.

What world do you think we come from? "Natural abhorence to violence?" It's a split second in history since we stopped, temporarly, celebrating violence as a good. If anything, the violence in schools is a result of social engineering attempting to stop the violence instead of moderate it, as they used to do with boxing gloves. Drive a natural instinct underground and it'll pop up worse than ever, where you least expect it.

Bankruptcy is an option that will relieve your situation. Snivelling and blaming other people is not.

Even his own side has disowned him for making stuff up. Look out Wade, you got company!

For now. After a few more blockades and demands for compensation, I suspect that grunts, howls, yips and smoke signals will also be included as a third.

Chretienese

Stop hitting on me. I feel objectified, cheap, and dirty.

But you see, you're implicitely doing exactly what Bill suggested the Greens do. You may not say it, but your whole critique, given your obvious prejudices, suggests that what the Greens say is the gospel truth. Otherwise why would you use terminology like "done better?" If you didn't hold that view, you would have phrased it far differently, since to my POV, "better" would be to scrap the Kyoto deal and start burning tires in the backyard so as to hasten GW, if indeed it is happening by virtue of himan means. Even the CBC has realized that Canada stands to benefit from GW in a big way.

Because I was addressing your post, in which you made the claim that not all Arabs are Muslims, which is making the claim that race is not religion. Further, you were defending the school on that basis, apparently under the mistaken impression that defending it under one set of criteria is much the same as defending it under another, as long as it is defended.

Perhaps you'll be good enough to show me even one example of this alleged whining?